"Other Rumored Lands" @ DHS

[dogdangling]

An expansion of the Pixar Studios are would be extremely ideal. I'd love to see the Monsters Inc. coaster come to fruition, as well as Crush's Coaster and an attraction having to do with Inside Out. There's so many options with Pixar attractions, which is why I'm confused why Disney has taken so long to create them.

The crush's coaster at Paris is a good ride but the throughput is terrible and has really long lines., they would have to come up with something different to make it work. I love the idea of a pixar land, some many good IP's

 

[seascapemvy]

A contract cannot be "air tight" and require attractions "shall be operated and maintained in a first class manner consistent with the highest standards of the theme park industry". That's an incredibly vague statement. What is first class? Does Space Mountain count for example? If so then Universal really don't have to do much upkeep at all.

Do you have a legal background? You are making categorical statements about the contract which I suspect you can't really back up not least because unless you were a signatory to the contract any versions of it you have seen are incomplete. My reading of that 2nd gate language is that it simple designates where the Marvel attractions will be. In which case no adjustment is required at all.

I'm not a lawyer, I do however administrate subcontracts for a living.

You have a point that first class manner and highest standards are subjective. However the standard is not that hard to understand and enforce. Universal has to keep all the marvel attractions up to the same standards they set with HP. That is why they had to upgrade Hulk. Universal set what can objectively been shown and enforced. It is a higher standard than Six Flags has to keep DC characters but Universal is not Six Flags. They can't compare marvel to any rides at Disney only Universal.

As for my background I work in the regulatory area and enforce laws, rules and regulations. The issue of the second gate is as you said Marvel is to be in the second gate of a two park resort. Can Universal add a third gate and keep Marvel? That will be up to Universal, Disney and arbitration and possible legal action to decide. Personally I think a fair deal for everyone would be for Universal to give up the rights for Marvel with the exception of Spiderman and Hulk in exchange for worldwide rights for those two charachters. Disney then could use the Marvel name and characters they want and Universal would get to expand those two charachters around the world. Both companies would win and profit from this.

 

[Eoghann]

You have a point that first class manner and highest standards are subjective. However the standard is not that hard to understand and enforce. Universal has to keep all the marvel attractions up to the same standards they set with HP. That is why they had to upgrade Hulk. Universal set what can objectively been shown and enforced. It is a higher standard than Six Flags has to keep DC characters but Universal is not Six Flags. They can't compare marvel to any rides at Disney only Universal.

It says no such thing in the contract. It talks about the industry not Universal, so it would be highest standards for the industry as a whole, by default that is Disney who are seen as setting the gold standard (although the truth is arguable there). But even if we were to only look at Universal, what are these maintenance standards in Harry Potter that are so much superior to any other part of the park anyway? The language so vague as to be meaningless. You could have six people arguing for six different standards. Unless the rides are falling apart I don't think Disney's lawyers could do much of anything with it.

As for my background I work in the regulatory area and enforce laws, rules and regulations. The issue of the second gate is as you said Marvel is to be in the second gate of a two park resort. Can Universal add a third gate and keep Marvel? That will be up to Universal, Disney and arbitration and possible legal action to decide. Personally I think a fair deal for everyone would be for Universal to give up the rights for Marvel with the exception of Spiderman and Hulk in exchange for worldwide rights for those two charachters. Disney then could use the Marvel name and characters they want and Universal would get to expand those two charachters around the world. Both companies would win and profit from this.

If 2nd gate is simply a designation rather than a proscription arbitration would likely not be required. If Disney had a burning desire to throw their lawyers at it (which they've shown no sign of so far) they could protest, but even then I strongly doubt they'd have much of a case and would probably lose. As written there's nothing to suggest that 2nd Gate is a limitation on the maximum number of gates just that at the time the agreement was written it was envisaged as a 2 gate park. This is the sort of minor change (company business unit was previously named Information Systems now it's called Technology Services for example) that happens all the time without arbitration or the involvement of lawyers at all.

The facts on record are:

• Disney hasn't even put any Marvel stuff in DCA yet despite having an area set aside for it and zero legal issues.
• Disney has a slew of expensive projects under construction or about to begin so any additional work would be 5+ years away from even starting and there's no obvious need for the Marvel IP at this time.
• Universal has publicly said they do not plan to relinquish the license

Anything else is wild speculation and wishful thinking. Could Disney at some point get the license back? Sure, I'd even say probably eventually, but it might be in 2 decades time. There's absolutely nothing pointing to it happening now.

 

[sachilles]

I think if another "land" is part of a future project it needs to be a little more general in nature. You have Avatar, star wars and toy story all lending theme to the new lands. However if you think about other lands, they tend to have a higher level theme, so that multiple IP's can exist in the land. Pixar place is good as you can have multiple character sets fit in it. However, when you use Cars for example, you are limited to what fits in those world of movies.

 

[rteetz]

I think if another "land" is part of a future project it needs to be a little more general in nature. You have Avatar, star wars and toy story all lending theme to the new lands. However if you think about other lands, they tend to have a higher level theme, so that multiple IP's can exist in the land. Pixar place is good as you can have multiple character sets fit in it. However, when you use Cars for example, you are limited to what fits in those world of movies.

That's the whole point of the new DHS though. No general areas each IP gets its own land. Star Wars land, toy story land, muppets mini land, monsters inc or whatever.

 

[seascapemvy]

It says no such thing in the contract. It talks about the industry not Universal, so it would be highest standards for the industry as a whole, by default that is Disney who are seen as setting the gold standard (although the truth is arguable there). But even if we were to only look at Universal, what are these maintenance standards in Harry Potter that are so much superior to any other part of the park anyway? The language so vague as to be meaningless. You could have six people arguing for six different standards. Unless the rides are falling apart I don't think Disney's lawyers could do much of anything with it.



If 2nd gate is simply a designation rather than a proscription arbitration would likely not be required. If Disney had a burning desire to throw their lawyers at it (which they've shown no sign of so far) they could protest, but even then I strongly doubt they'd have much of a case and would probably lose. As written there's nothing to suggest that 2nd Gate is a limitation on the maximum number of gates just that at the time the agreement was written it was envisaged as a 2 gate park. This is the sort of minor change (company business unit was previously named Information Systems now it's called Technology Services for example) that happens all the time without arbitration or the involvement of lawyers at all.

The facts on record are:

• Disney hasn't even put any Marvel stuff in DCA yet despite having an area set aside for it and zero legal issues.
• Disney has a slew of expensive projects under construction or about to begin so any additional work would be 5+ years away from even starting and there's no obvious need for the Marvel IP at this time.
• Universal has publicly said they do not plan to relinquish the license

Anything else is wild speculation and wishful thinking. Could Disney at some point get the license back? Sure, I'd even say probably eventually, but it might be in 2 decades time. There's absolutely nothing pointing to it happening now.

Section one described the parties and the plan.



I.PROJECT DESCRIPTION

MCA is developing a complete destination resort on approximately 800 acres owned by it and a partner in Orlando, Florida, on which Universal Studios Florida is located and attracted approximately 7 million visitors in 1992.

When completed, as presently planned the resort will consist of the existing theme park and HARD ROCK CAFE, plus a second gated theme park (“THE SECOND GATE”), four highly themed hotels totalling 4,000 rooms, a themed entertainment and shopping complex, as well as a golf course, tennis club and spa. It is contemplated that the total cost of building out these facilities over the next decade will be approximately $3 billion. The total complex is hereafter referred to as “Universal City Florida”.

THE SECOND GATE will be similar in size, quality and originality to Universal Studios Florida and is expected to generate even greater attendance, stay time and visitor expenditures given the unique appeal of the park and the synergies which will arise from the total destination resort

 

[Lee Matthews]

more rides/areas based on pixar is all I would like to see as a further phase to DHS. I don't think Marvel needs to come to the parks really

 

[rteetz]

Section one described the parties and the plan.



I.PROJECT DESCRIPTION

MCA is developing a complete destination resort on approximately 800 acres owned by it and a partner in Orlando, Florida, on which Universal Studios Florida is located and attracted approximately 7 million visitors in 1992.

When completed, as presently planned the resort will consist of the existing theme park and HARD ROCK CAFE, plus a second gated theme park (“THE SECOND GATE”), four highly themed hotels totalling 4,000 rooms, a themed entertainment and shopping complex, as well as a golf course, tennis club and spa. It is contemplated that the total cost of building out these facilities over the next decade will be approximately $3 billion. The total complex is hereafter referred to as “Universal City Florida”.

THE SECOND GATE will be similar in size, quality and originality to Universal Studios Florida and is expected to generate even greater attendance, stay time and visitor expenditures given the unique appeal of the park and the synergies which will arise from the total destination resort

I'm confused here what does this have to do with anything? Marvel is in Universal's second gate, that second gate is what is known as Islands of Adventure. If and when universal does a third gate how does that change anything if universal doesn't plan to put any marvel in that third park. I'm sure universal would just keep marvel in IOA.

 

[seascapemvy]

I'm confused here what does this have to do with anything? Marvel is in Universal's second gate, that second gate is what is known as Islands of Adventure. If and when universal does a third gate how does that change anything if universal doesn't plan to put any marvel in that third park. I'm sure universal would just keep marvel in IOA.

It is why an updated agreement is needed if Universal builds a third gate. The negotiations were for a 2 gate park with Marvel playing an extremely large part of the resort. Now if there is to be a third gate with more IP Marvel would have the right to demand more compensation or get out of the contract.

 

[rteetz]

It is why an updated agreement is needed if Universal builds a third gate. The negotiations were for a 2 gate park with Marvel playing an extremely large part of the resort. Now if there is to be a third gate with more IP Marvel would have the right to demand more compensation or get out of the contract.

What if they build a third gate but it has no marvel? Nothing I have seen says universal wants to add more marvel to a potential third gate. Universal is interested though in expanding marvel at IOA.

 

[seascapemvy]

What if they build a third gate but it has no marvel? Nothing I have seen says universal wants to add more marvel to a potential third gate. Universal is interested though in expanding marvel at IOA.

That is the point. Marvel signed a contract giving the rights in exchange for payment and advertising with the firm understanding that Marvel woild play a large part in a two gate park. Now if Universal were to become a 3 gate park and Marvelcif only the 2nd most important IP in gate 2 and nothing in 1 or 3 then the company they made the deal with is substantially changed and have the right to demand the contract renegotiated. That alone does not mean the rights should go back to Disney. I see a reasonable deal should be worked out but the power is no longer solely with Universal if they want a third gate. However we may all be wrong and Universal may only want more hotel room, shopping and restaurants night clubs. Then nothing has to be done.

 

[rteetz]

That is the point. Marvel signed a contract giving the rights in exchange for payment and advertising with the firm understanding that Marvel woild play a large part in a two gate park. Now if Universal were to become a 3 gate park and Marvelcif only the 2nd most important IP in gate 2 and nothing in 1 or 3 then the company they made the deal with is substantially changed and have the right to demand the contract renegotiated. That alone does not mean the rights should go back to Disney. I see a reasonable deal should be worked out but the power is no longer solely with Universal if they want a third gate. However we may all be wrong and Universal may only want more hotel room, shopping and restaurants night clubs. Then nothing has to be done.

Universal has more room for hotels already. You don't purchase 450+ acres without long term plans for a third gate.

 

[Eoghann]

Section one described the parties and the plan.

I.PROJECT DESCRIPTION

MCA is developing a complete destination resort on approximately 800 acres owned by it and a partner in Orlando, Florida, on which Universal Studios Florida is located and attracted approximately 7 million visitors in 1992.

When completed, as presently planned the resort will consist of the existing theme park and HARD ROCK CAFE, plus a second gated theme park (“THE SECOND GATE”), four highly themed hotels totalling 4,000 rooms, a themed entertainment and shopping complex, as well as a golf course, tennis club and spa. It is contemplated that the total cost of building out these facilities over the next decade will be approximately $3 billion. The total complex is hereafter referred to as “Universal City Florida”.

THE SECOND GATE will be similar in size, quality and originality to Universal Studios Florida and is expected to generate even greater attendance, stay time and visitor expenditures given the unique appeal of the park and the synergies which will arise from the total destination resort

Non issue. See bolded portion. This sort of stuff is in contracts all the time.

Adding a 3rd gate wouldn't invalidate anything. Any lawyer who can't argue that should be fired immediately. Following your line of reasoning the failure to spend approximately $3 billion over a decade or generate greater attendance would invalidate the agreement.

 

[seascapemvy]

Non issue. See bolded portion. This sort of stuff is in contracts all the time.

Adding a 3rd gate wouldn't invalidate anything. Any lawyer who can't argue that should be fired immediately. Following your line of reasoning the failure to spend approximately $3 billion over a decade or generate greater attendance would invalidate the agreement.

Yes things like that are in contracts all the time. However ask any lawyer and they will tell you its the small things in a contract that can be used to break it. Disney only put marvel on the loop monorail and not the one that goes through EPCOT. Disney also demanded upgrades to the Hulk. You can deny that but its true. If universal does not keep the Marval attractions up to he standards Universal set for HP they can and will lose the rights to Marvel. Universal also had to upgrade what was already a great Spiderman ride to 4k because of HP.

Disney will have the same issue with Avatar and James Cameron. He will demand Pandora be kept second to none in WDW. Six Flags doesn't have a problem with DC rights because their themeing stinks but is consistent and the rides are in good shape but nowhere near Universal's first rate standards or even Disney's. And for the record Universal's HP standard is higher than Disney's current attractions. Pandora and Star Wars will have to kick it up a notch. But remember contract can be broken or renegotiated and the Marvel contract is ripe for renegotiation if Universal wants to build a third gate.

Keep this in mind, JKR is known to drive Universal crazy with her demands for perfection. Universal has and will continue to agree to her demands because of all the money HP brings in but as a result they also have to spend on Marvel, Simpsons and Nintendo. The more third party IP they have the more they have to keep upgrading. That is Disney's biggest advantage. Most of Disney's old rides would have to be upgraded if the owner of the IP demanded but since they own it ot doesn't. Besides I love the old dark rides which most people here would agree are no longer first rate but infact outdated using old technology.

 

[rteetz]

Yes things like that are in contracts all the time. However ask any lawyer and they will tell you its the small things in a contract that can be used to break it. Disney only put marvel on the loop monorail and not the one that goes through EPCOT. Disney also demanded upgrades to the Hulk. You can deny that but its true. If universal does not keep the Marval attractions up to he standards Universal set for HP they can and will lose the rights to Marvel. Universal also had to upgrade what was already a great Spiderman ride to 4k because of HP.

Disney will have the same issue with Avatar and James Cameron. He will demand Pandora be kept second to none in WDW. Six Flags doesn't have a problem with DC rights because their themeing stinks but is consistent and the rides are in good shape but nowhere near Universal's first rate standards or even Disney's. And for the record Universal's HP standard is higher than Disney's current attractions. Pandora and Star Wars will have to kick it up a notch. But remember contract can be broken or renegotiated and the Marvel contract is ripe for renegotiation if Universal wants to build a third gate.

Keep this in mind, JKR is known to drive Universal crazy with her demands for perfection. Universal has and will continue to agree to her demands because of all the money HP brings in but as a result they also have to spend on Marvel, Simpsons and Nintendo. The more third party IP they have the more they have to keep upgrading. That is Disney's biggest advantage. Most of Disney's old rides would have to be upgraded if the owner of the IP demanded but since they own it ot doesn't. Besides I love the old dark rides which most people here would agree are no longer first rate but infact outdated using old technology.

Where and when did Disney demand upgrades to the hulk? I 100% believe the hulk redo was all universal and had nothing to do with Disney. I want to know where you found out for sure that Disney made them upgrade the hulk.

Disney didn't create this contract they inherited it.

 

[Pigletpal40]

Just think, if Comcast did buy out Disney you might get on a ride in the FP+ line some time between 8 am and 5 pm!

 

[rteetz]

Just think, if Comcast did buy out Disney you might get on a ride in the FP+ line some time between 8 am and 5 pm!

What?

 

[Pigletpal40]

What?

I guess you've never had a Comcast Tech come to your house for service.

 

[rteetz]

I guess you've never had a Comcast Tech come to your house for service.

Nope don't have Comcast in the Midwest. Time warner Cable.

 

[Eoghann]

Yes things like that are in contracts all the time. However ask any lawyer and they will tell you its the small things in a contract that can be used to break it. Disney only put marvel on the loop monorail and not the one that goes through EPCOT. Disney also demanded upgrades to the Hulk. You can deny that but its true. If universal does not keep the Marval attractions up to he standards Universal set for HP they can and will lose the rights to Marvel. Universal also had to upgrade what was already a great Spiderman ride to 4k because of HP.

You are making a lot of claims and not providing any evidence to back them up. When did Disney demand an update to Hulk, how do you know that Universal was forced to upgrade Spider-man rather than simply chose to?

And none of that changes my basic point which is that the section you are quoting is descriptive not proscriptive. That's an important legal distinction.

Disney will have the same issue with Avatar and James Cameron. He will demand Pandora be kept second to none in WDW. Six Flags doesn't have a problem with DC rights because their themeing stinks but is consistent and the rides are in good shape but nowhere near Universal's first rate standards or even Disney's. And for the record Universal's HP standard is higher than Disney's current attractions. Pandora and Star Wars will have to kick it up a notch. But remember contract can be broken or renegotiated and the Marvel contract is ripe for renegotiation if Universal wants to build a third gate.

Another claim without proof. Have you somehow seen the terms of the agreement between Cameron and Disney? You have no idea what he may or may not have the right to demand. He's a control freak so it's possible he has all sorts of clauses in the license, then again he may have been desperate enough for "someone" to build his Pandora that he accepted Disney's terms. The point is you don't know, so stop making these broad categorical statements.

Just repeatedly saying things without backing them up doesn't make them more true.